XRH0.L vs. XNAS.L
XRH0.L (Xtrackers Physical Rhodium ETC) and XNAS.L (Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XRH0.L is a Metals fund tracking the Rhodium, while XNAS.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XRH0.L returned 18.90%/yr vs 28.10%/yr for XNAS.L. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XRH0.L charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XNAS.L.
Performance
XRH0.L vs. XNAS.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XRH0.L achieves a -15.28% return, which is significantly lower than XNAS.L's 19.67% return.
XRH0.L
- 1D
- 0.78%
- 1M
- -3.00%
- YTD
- -15.28%
- 6M
- 10.23%
- 1Y
- 73.21%
- 3Y*
- 18.90%
- 5Y*
- -13.58%
- 10Y*
- 29.93%
XNAS.L
- 1D
- -0.68%
- 1M
- 8.53%
- YTD
- 19.67%
- 6M
- 19.16%
- 1Y
- 40.41%
- 3Y*
- 28.10%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XRH0.L vs. XNAS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XRH0.L Xtrackers Physical Rhodium ETC | -15.28% | 205.23% | -14.69% | -60.81% | 15.96% |
XNAS.L Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF | 19.67% | 19.83% | 26.60% | 56.41% | -1.82% |
Correlation
The correlation between XRH0.L and XNAS.L is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2022 | 0.05 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
XRH0.L vs. XNAS.L — Risk / Return Rank
XRH0.L
XNAS.L
XRH0.L vs. XNAS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Physical Rhodium ETC (XRH0.L) and Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| XRH0.L | XNAS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.68 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.44 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.12 | 3.67 | -1.55 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.10 | 13.19 | -9.09 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XRH0.L | XNAS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.03 | 2.54 | -1.51 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.21 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.47 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.20 | 1.69 | -1.49 |
Drawdowns
XRH0.L vs. XNAS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XRH0.L drawdown since its inception was -85.90%, which is greater than XNAS.L's maximum drawdown of -22.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XRH0.L and XNAS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XRH0.L | XNAS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -85.90% | -22.92% | -62.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -34.33% | -10.91% | -23.42% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -46.87% | -22.92% | -23.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -82.47% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -85.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -61.74% | -0.76% | -60.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -51.31% | -3.03% | -48.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 17.81% | 3.05% | +14.76% |
Volatility
XRH0.L vs. XNAS.L - Volatility Comparison
Xtrackers Physical Rhodium ETC (XRH0.L) has a higher volatility of 12.10% compared to Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.L) at 4.96%. This indicates that XRH0.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XNAS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XRH0.L | XNAS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.10% | 4.96% | +7.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 52.72% | 11.72% | +41.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 71.00% | 15.78% | +55.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 64.08% | 19.39% | +44.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 64.25% | 19.39% | +44.86% |
XRH0.L vs. XNAS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XRH0.L has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than XNAS.L's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
XRH0.L vs. XNAS.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XRH0.L nor XNAS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XRH0.L and XNAS.L have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XNAS.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XNAS.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for XRH0.L.
XRH0.L is categorized as Metals, while XNAS.L is Nasdaq-100. XRH0.L tracks Rhodium, while XNAS.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for XRH0.L and 0.20% for XNAS.L.
Find the right allocation for XRH0.L and XNAS.L
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer